Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
DETAILED ACTION
Claims status
Claims 1-20 were amended are pending on 08/24/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by . MARSHALL, CN 103907034A, DATE PUBLISHED: 2014-07-02, CPC G01W 1/16.
Regarding claim 1:
MARSHALL described a computer-implemented method comprising:
determining a geographic site to be assessed for lightning activity over a period of time (abstract, computing device data associated with lightning activity);
obtaining weather information associated with the geographic site, the weather information being generated by a weather prediction model for the period of time, wherein the weather information comprises a grid-based representation of a weather map (0009, 0013, predicting severe weather, map of the geographic area at risk, 0031, perform a series of grid processing to determine lightning position and contour of the monomer), each grid point in the grid-based representation being associated with respective weather-related metrics predicted by the weather prediction model (0031, perform a series of grid processing to determine lightning position and contour of the monomer);
determining one or more grid points from the grid-based representation of the weather map to assess the geographic site for lightning activity (0031, series of grid processing to determine lightning position and contour of the monomer 302. data analysis module 104 used in a certain time period (e.g., one minute) collected during the lightning flash data and lightning flash (e.g.,flash 304) is placed on the map.) the one or more grids points being selected based on a spatial relationship between the one or more grid points and the geographic area site (0031, a series of grid processing to determine lightning position and contour of the monomer 302. data analysis module 104 used in a certain time period (e.g., one minute) collected during the lightning flash data and lightning flash (e.g., flash 304) is placed on the map. Then, the data analysis module 104 compares the rough grid is overlapped on the map to quickly locate areas of interest for further analysis. 0038, picture 5 is 502 the map of geographic area 500 in the severe weather risk by the identification system 100 based on the lightning activity data);
evaluating weather-related metrics associated with the one or more grid points determined for assessing the geographic site (0031, the data analysis module 104 compares the rough grid is overlapped on the map);
determining one or more likelihoods of the geographic site experiencing lightning activity during the period of time based at least in part on the evaluation of the weather-related metrics associated with the one or more grid points (0033, tracking of associated with the severe weather probability, and the threshold lightning rate by the system); and
providing weather forecast information for the geographic site, the weather forecast information including at least the one or more likelihoods of the geographic site experiencing lightning activity during the period of time (0034, total lightning rate showing various lightning monomer (e.g., monomer 3 of FIG.302) over a certain time space of 402 to a threshold lightning rate comparison 404 of FIG. 400. Data analysis module 104 by analyzing a specific time interval).
Regarding claim 11:
MARSHALL described a computer-implemented method comprising:
determining a geographic site to be assessed for lightning activity at point in time;
obtaining weather information associated with the geographic site, wherein the weather information is forecasted by a weather prediction model for the point in time (0009, 0013, predicting severe weather, map of the geographic area at risk, 0031, perform a series of grid processing to determine lightning position and contour of the monomer);
determining at least one grid point in a grid-based representation of the weather information to assess the geographic site for lightning activity (0031, series of grid processing to determine lightning position and contour of the monomer 302. data analysis module 104 used in a certain time period (e.g., one minute) collected during the lightning flash data and lightning flash (e.g.,flash 304) is placed on the map.;
each grid point of the grid-based representation being associative weather-related metric predicted by the weather prediction model, the at least one grid point being selected based on a spatial relationship between the at least one grid point and the geographic site (0031, a series of grid processing to determine lightning position and contour of the monomer 302. data analysis module 104 used in a certain time period (e.g., one minute) collected during the lightning flash data and lightning flash (e.g., flash 304) is placed on the map. Then, the data analysis module 104 compares the rough grid is overlapped on the map to quickly locate areas of interest for further analysis. 0038, picture 5 is 502 the map of geographic area 500 in the severe weather risk by the identification system 100 based on the lightning activity data);
determining lightning information for the geographic site based at least in part on an evaluation of weather-related metrics associated with the at least one grid point, wherein the lightning information forecasts lightning activity for the geographic site at the point in time (0033, tracking of associated with the severe weather probability, and the threshold lightning rate by the system); and providing lightning information for the geographic site, wherein the lightning information includes at least information describing lightning activity forecasted for the geographic site at the point in time (0034, total lightning rate showing various lightning monomer (e.g., monomer 3 of FIG.302) over a certain time space of 402 to a threshold lightning rate comparison 404 of FIG. 400. Data analysis module 104 by analyzing a specific time interval).
Regarding claim 16:
MARSHALL described a system comprising at least one processor and memory storing instructions that cause the system to perform: determining a geographic site to be assessed for lightning activity at point in time (abstract, computing device data associated with lightning activity);
obtaining weather information associated with the geographic site, wherein the weather information is forecasted by a weather prediction model for the point in time (0009, 0013, predicting severe weather, map of the geographic area at risk, 0031, perform a series of grid processing to determine lightning position and contour of the monomer);
determining at least one grid point in a grid-based representation of the weather information to assess the geographic site for lightning activity (0009, 0013, predicting severe weather, map of the geographic area at risk, 0031, perform a series of grid processing to determine lightning position and contour of the monomer);
each grid point of the grid-based representation being associative weather-related metric predicted by the weather prediction model, the at least one grid point being selected based on a spatial relationship between the at least one grid point and the geographic site (0031, a series of grid processing to determine lightning position and contour of the monomer 302. data analysis module 104 used in a certain time period (e.g., one minute) collected during the lightning flash data and lightning flash (e.g., flash 304) is placed on the map. Then, the data analysis module 104 compares the rough grid is overlapped on the map to quickly locate areas of interest for further analysis. 0038, picture 5 is 502 the map of geographic area 500 in the severe weather risk by the identification system 100 based on the lightning activity data);
determining lightning information for the geographic site based at least in part on an evaluation of weather-related metrics associated with the at least one grid point, wherein the lightning information forecasts lightning activity for the geographic site at the point in time (0033, tracking of associated with the severe weather probability, and the threshold lightning rate by the system); and providing lightning information for the geographic site, wherein the lightning information includes at least information describing lightning activity forecasted for the geographic site at the point in time (0034, total lightning rate showing various lightning monomer (e.g., monomer 3 of FIG.302) over a certain time space of 402 to a threshold lightning rate comparison 404 of FIG. 400. Data analysis module 104 by analyzing a specific time interval).
Regarding claim 2, MARSHALL further described wherein weather-related metrics associated with a grid point in the grid-based representation of the weather map are predicted by the weather prediction model for a geographic location corresponding to the grid point, and wherein the weather-related metrics include at least one of: one or more lightning flash density values predicted for the grid point (0031, density function to locate the lightning , 0033, flash rate), one or more Convective Available Potential Energy (CAPE) values predicted for the grid point, one or more Convective Rain Rate (CRR) values predicted for the grid point, or one or more K-index values predicted for the grid point.
Regarding claim 3, MARSHALL further described identifying one or more grid points in the grid-based representation of the weather map that are positioned within a threshold distance of the geographic site (031, rid processing to determine lightning position, 0033, flash rate of the threshold).
Regarding claim 4, MARSHALL further described determining the one or more grid points from the grid-based representation of the weather map to assess the geographic site for lightning activity comprises: determining a plurality of grid points in the grid-based representation of the weather map that encompass the geographic site based at least in part on a bounding shape (fig. 3).
Regarding claim 5, MARSHALL further described determining an explicit prediction based at least in part on weather-metrics associated with the one or more grid points determined for assessing the geographic site for lightning activity (fig. 3), the explicit prediction being based at least in part on lightning flash density values associated with the one or more grid points (fig. 3, 304); and determining an implicit prediction based at least in part on weather-metrics associated with the one or more grid points determined for assessing the geographic site for lightning activity (0029, flash density value of the given time period determines a polygon as a boundary. data analyzing module 104 the data packet is the collected flash lightning), the implicit prediction being based at least in part on one or more of: Convective Available Potential Energy (CAPE) values associated with the one or more grid points determined for assessing the geographic site (fig. 3, 0034, threshold lightning rate), Convective Rain Rate (CRR) values associated with the one or more grid points determined for assessing the geographic site, or K-index values associated with the one or more grid points determined for assessing the geographic site.
Regarding claim 6, MARSHALL further described the explicit prediction is calculated as a fraction with a numerator that corresponds to a count of grid posts in the one or more grid posts that have a non-zero lightning flash density value and a denominator that corresponds to a total count of grid posts in the one or more grid posts (fig. 3, 0034, 32, 34, threshold lightning rate).
Regarding claim 7, MARSHALL further described wherein the implicit prediction is calculated as a weighted average of at least one of: Convective Available Potential Energy (CAPE) values associated with the one or more grid points determined for assessing the geographic site (0013, ionospheric flash, 0034, lightning monomer), Convective Rain Rate (CRR) values associated with the one or more grid points determined for assessing the geographic site, or K-index values associated with the one or more grid points determined for assessing the geographic site.
Regarding claim 8, MARSHALL further described wherein a likelihood of the geographic site experiencing lightning activity during the period of time is calculated as a weighted average of one or more values associated with the explicit prediction and one or more values associated with the implicit prediction (0044, any form of sensory feedback).
Regarding claim 9, MARSHALL further described determining that at least one of the one or more likelihoods of the geographic site experiencing lightning activity during the period of time satisfy a threshold likelihood value; and providing an alert to a computing system associated with the geographic site in response to the determination (0009, the lightning rate exceeds a threshold lightning rate value, the computing device monitoring the geographic area in danger of giving alarm).
Regarding claim 10, MARSHALL further described providing a graphical user interface corresponding to a weather monitoring platform, the graphical user interface including at least: a visual map of the geographic site and lightning information determined for the geographic site (0044, visual to user interface interaction).
Regarding claim 12, MARSHALL further described identifying one or more grid points in the grid-based representation of the weather information that are positioned within a threshold distance of the geographic site (fig. 3, 302, 304).
Regarding claim 13, MARSHALL further described determining a plurality of grid points in the grid-based representation of the weather information that bound the geographic site based at least in part on a bounding shape (fig. 3, 302, 304).
Regarding claim 14, MARSHALL further described determining a likelihood of lightning activity occurring at the geographic site at the point in time based at least in part on an evaluation of (a) lightning flash density values associated with the at least one grid point at the point in time (fig. 3, 304, 0031, perform a series of grid processing), (b) Convective Available Potential Energy (CAPE) values associated with the at least one grid point at the point in time; (c) Convective Rain Rate (CRR) values associated with the at least one grid point at the point in time, or (d) K-index values associated with the at least one grid point at the point in time, or a combination thereof.
Regarding claim 15, MARSHALL further described wherein the lightning information includes the likelihood of lightning activity occurring at the geographic site at the point in time (0029, a flash density value of the given time period).
Regarding claim 17, MARSHALL further described when determining at least one grid point in a grid-based representation of the weather information to assess the geographic site for lightning activity, the system performs: identifying one or more grid points in the grid-based representation of the weather information that are positioned within a threshold distance of the geographic site (fig. 3, 304, 302, 0038, polygon such as distance and direction range).
Regarding claim 18, MARSHALL further described determining a plurality of grid points in the grid-based representation of the weather information that bound the geographic site based at least in part on a bounding shape (fig. 3, 304, 302,).
Regarding claim 19, MARSHALL further described when determining lightning information for the geographic site, the system performs: determining a likelihood of lightning activity occurring at the geographic site at the point in time based at least in part on an evaluation of (a) lightning flash density values associated with the at least one grid point at the point in time (fig. 3, 304, 0031, perform a series of grid processing), (b) Convective Available Potential Energy (CAPE) values associated with the at least one grid point at the point in time; (c) Convective Rain Rate (CRR) values associated with the at least one grid point at the point in time, or (d) K-index values associated with the at least one grid point at the point in time, or a combination thereof.
Regarding claim 20, MARSHALL further described wherein the lightning information includes the likelihood of lightning activity occurring at the geographic site at the point in time (0013, the number of the lightning event per minute).
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant's arguments filed 8/24/2026 have been fully considered, the argument as follow:
A. Applicant argues in the arguments that the prior art does not show “the one or more grids points being selected based on a spatial relationship between the one or more grid points and the geographic area site” and “each grid point of the grid-based representation being associative weather-related metric predicted by the weather prediction model, the at least one grid point being selected based on a spatial relationship between the at least one grid point and the geographic site”
MARSHALL described “the one or more grids points being selected based on a spatial relationship between the one or more grid points and the geographic area site” and “each grid point of the grid-based representation being associative weather-related metric predicted by the weather prediction model, the at least one grid point being selected based on a spatial relationship between the at least one grid point and the geographic site” in 0031, 0038, fig. 5, where MARSHALL described in 0031, a series of grid processing to determine lightning position and contour of the monomer 302. data analysis module 104 used in a certain time period (e.g., one minute) collected during the lightning flash data and lightning flash (e.g., flash 304) is placed on the map. Then, the data analysis module 104 compares the rough grid is overlapped on the map to quickly locate areas of interest for further analysis. 0038, picture 5 is 502 the map of geographic area 500 in the severe weather risk by the identification system 100 based on the lightning activity data, the above read on to the amended claim invention
PNG
media_image1.png
471
787
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In view of the above analysis, the examiner respectfully disagreed with the applicant argument, applicant's arguments filed 08/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact information
4. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tung Lau whose telephone number is (571)272-2274, email is Tungs.lau@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Tuesday-Friday 7:00 AM-5:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, TURNER SHELBY, can be reached on 571-272-6334. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll- free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272- 1000.
/TUNG S LAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Technology Center 2800
August 31, 2026
Prosecution Insights